If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Websleuths needs YOU to be a part of a groundbreaking docu-series about serial killers and sleuthing

CLICK HERE to read about the cases featured in the series including West Mesa, Daytona, I-4, Central Florida and Long Island Serial Killer

Don't Talk to the Cops Video Series

Don't Talk to the Cops Video Series

We've discussed a lot in this forum about whether people should talk to LE without an attorney. Several of us have linked in this excellent six part video series, which is a seminar given by an attorney and a LE officer.

It's frequently referred to as Don't Talk to the Cops, and also called In Praise of the 5th Amendment.

Highly recommended for all sleuthers! These videos are just a wealth of information.

Good series. Very interesting. Reminds me of a few pointers I read regarding interrogation (was years ago so just a brief summary based on memory).

No doubt it is best to NOT talk. But for those that choose to talk...

1) Innocent people will get emotional when put under pressure or accused of a heinous crime, the more times the are accused the more emotional they get. Many guilty people stonewall and "stick to their story" with a cold and unemotional facade.

2) Innocent people are quick to rule out possible suspects in order to help catch the perpetrator; guilty people don't want to rule out any other suspects.

3) Eye movement -- people naturally look upper left or upper right depending on whether they are remembering or "creating" a response. This is an automatic response and can be a dead giveaway.

4) A British Military officer with training in interrogation once told me if people stare it means one of three things; 1) they want to fight 2) they want to have sex with you (not the term he used) or 3) they are lying to you.

This is just a brief summary, no doubt the best idea is to NOT TALK but if one plans to make a statement these are just a few things to be mindful of.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sonya610 For This Useful Post:

Keep in mind the ONLY people interested in such laws are those who have committed crimes in the first place. As always: if you HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG, you have NO REASON TO WORRY about police abuse. Such questioning, in fact, is the ONLY way we can get many criminals to admit or at least infer crime has occurred, particularly with matters pertaining to child molestation and abuse.

I cannot condone this series. I have nothing to hide, and anyone who has nothing to hide would only be hurting themselves by following the videos. SOURCE: My wife is a law enforcement legal professional; and while the advice is biased, she works with victims' groups all the time.

Keep in mind the ONLY people interested in such laws are those who have committed crimes in the first place. As always: if you HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG, you have NO REASON TO WORRY about police abuse. Such questioning, in fact, is the ONLY way we can get many criminals to admit or at least infer crime has occurred, particularly with matters pertaining to child molestation and abuse.

I cannot condone this series. I have nothing to hide, and anyone who has nothing to hide would only be hurting themselves by following the videos. SOURCE: My wife is a law enforcement legal professional; and while the advice is biased, she works with victims' groups all the time.

Kevin Fox talked to LE without an attorney, and ended up in jail for a crime he didn't commit.

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to txsvicki For This Useful Post:

Keep in mind the ONLY people interested in such laws are those who have committed crimes in the first place. As always: if you HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG, you have NO REASON TO WORRY about police abuse. Such questioning, in fact, is the ONLY way we can get many criminals to admit or at least infer crime has occurred, particularly with matters pertaining to child molestation and abuse.

I cannot condone this series. I have nothing to hide, and anyone who has nothing to hide would only be hurting themselves by following the videos. SOURCE: My wife is a law enforcement legal professional; and while the advice is biased, she works with victims' groups all the time.

Most police are intelligent, honest, and ethical. Most. Unfortunately, the ones that are otherwise do not have “bad cop” tattoos on their foreheads, and there's no way for John Q. Public to tell the difference.

I can only assume, sir, that you have lived your entire life in communities where the police …

… never lie on the witness stand; never decide that a person is guilty before talking to them, based on nothing more than first impressions; never try to trick, intimidate, or force a citizen to waive Constitutional rights; are always honest and never corrupt; never make mistakes in recording a person's statement; always get jobs as police officers because of merit and not because “knowing someone” makes up for lack of qualifications; never arrest anyone for “contempt of cop”; never give a suspect a few whacks with a baton after handcuffing him to “teach him a lesson”; never give a compliant misdemeanor suspect a quick jab with a baton before handcuffing him in an attempt to provoke a defensive (and possibly felonious) reaction; never mysteriously “lose” evidence that puts them in a bad light; never plant physical evidence; never add items to the “personal property inventory” form of someone they've arrested in order to support additional charges; never pull someone over for “driving while black”; et cetera.

I am not a criminal. I do not associate with criminals. I do not aid and abet criminals. I have no direct knowledge of any criminal activity which would have any value in any evidentiary sense. I am not even the sort of person who would normally be the target of bigoted assumptions or profiling – I am a white male, well past thirty, well-educated, able to express myself clearly and articularly, dress conservatively, et cetera. And yet more than one of those things has happened to me personally. Nor is my experience the result of living in an unusually bad community. I've lived in four different places in three different states in my life, and have experienced and/or heard from credible sources of problems like this happening in all of those places.

There's one thing which has been left out of this discussion. I'm not an attorney, but I've been told this by two different lawyers. The fact that you refuse to speak to a police officer cannot be used against you.

It cannot be used to establish “reasonable suspicion” – the level of proof an officer needs to detain and/or frisk you. It cannot be used to establish “probable cause” – the level of proof an officer needs to arrest you. It cannot be used to establish a “prima facie case” – the level of proof necessary for a grand jury to indict you. It cannot be used to establish proof to the exclusion of all “reasonable doubt” – the level of proof necessary for a criminal conviction.

To repeat – you have nothing to lose by saying to a police officer “I'm going to remain silent” and doing exactly that.

In short, sir, I find your all-capped assertions that an innocent person has nothing to worry about from the police to be shockingly naïve, and your implied advice to always fully and freely cooperate with the police to be dangerous. Period.

It appears that you no longer frequent this board, but in parting I leave you with a question. Please ask your wife, the law enforcement legal professional, what she would do if she found herself under suspicion for a crime she didn't commit. Would she gab freely to the cops? Or would she clam up and lawyer up?

I don't believe young people under a certain age or people with learning disabilities or communication problems should ever talk to cops without an attorney.

IMO, juveniles should not talk to officials of any sort without their parent and/or parents present, either. Unless, of course, the parents are not allowed to be there under law for whatever reason. Then a someone acting as a victim advocate, or lawyer (depending on why the child is speaking to whomever) is a good idea as well - unless it is an emergency situation and information is paramount to someone's well-being, etc...

One should always make a point to be aware of their basic rights when dealing with any government or Law Enforcement Agency, and the basic rules they, and you must proceed under by law. It's just the smart thing to do for yourself, and for others, as well, IMO.

I am not a lawyer, so therefore I have no opinion on the video linked on this thread, nor any contrasting opinions, either...

Keep in mind the ONLY people interested in such laws are those who have committed crimes in the first place. As always: if you HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG, you have NO REASON TO WORRY about police abuse. Such questioning, in fact, is the ONLY way we can get many criminals to admit or at least infer crime has occurred, particularly with matters pertaining to child molestation and abuse.

I cannot condone this series. I have nothing to hide, and anyone who has nothing to hide would only be hurting themselves by following the videos. SOURCE: My wife is a law enforcement legal professional; and while the advice is biased, she works with victims' groups all the time.

With respect, I don't think you could be more wrong. The annals of false convictions are filled with innocent people who refused a lawyer and assumed their innocence would protect them during an interrogation.

My apology to your wife: it's not that I believe members of LE are inherently dishonest. But it is their job to look for inconsistencies, while innocent people are often inconsistent simply because we are human.

Keep in mind the ONLY people interested in such laws are those who have committed crimes in the first place. As always: if you HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG, you have NO REASON TO WORRY about police abuse.

I completely disagree. The police may not be the "bad guys" BUT the DA is paid to charge and WIN. If they think they can WIN a case against you they often do even if you are innocent.

That is drilled into gun owners, if you have to use your firearm in self defense do NOT TALK WITHOUT AN ATTORNEY! DO NOT assume they will "see you as a good guy" because you WERE the good guy. Even if the police do not think you did anything wrong it is NOT their call, the DA can go after whomever they like.

It can have nothing to do with "guilt or innocent" but everything to do with if you could add another knotch to the DA's belt.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sonya610 For This Useful Post:

Keep in mind the ONLY people interested in such laws are those who have committed crimes in the first place. As always: if you HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG, you have NO REASON TO WORRY about police abuse. Such questioning, in fact, is the ONLY way we can get many criminals to admit or at least infer crime has occurred, particularly with matters pertaining to child molestation and abuse.

I cannot condone this series. I have nothing to hide, and anyone who has nothing to hide would only be hurting themselves by following the videos. SOURCE: My wife is a law enforcement legal professional; and while the advice is biased, she works with victims' groups all the time.

This is utterly false, I can speak with personal experience. Fishing expeditions can only lead to trouble. Too many false confessions, too many cases of statements out of context... civil rights violations are real. People now are constantly harassed and arrested for simply recording the police in attempts to protect themselves.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jgrabko For This Useful Post:

This is utterly false, I can speak with personal experience. Fishing expeditions can only lead to trouble. Too many false confessions, too many cases of statements out of context... civil rights violations are real. People now are constantly harassed and arrested for simply recording the police in attempts to protect themselves.

I agree wholeheartedly. There are too many documented cases where someone thought they were being cooperative in order to help investigators, only to have their words misinterpreted or twisted and used against them. Even if totally innocent, I would say nothing without my attorney present. It makes no sense at all to open yourself up to undue scrutiny.

The Following User Says Thank You to krkrjx For This Useful Post:

I agree wholeheartedly. There are too many documented cases where someone thought they were being cooperative in order to help investigators, only to have their words misinterpreted or twisted and used against them. Even if totally innocent, I would say nothing without my attorney present. It makes no sense at all to open yourself up to undue scrutiny.

I believe that LE will sometimes fall into the habit of using statistics and hunches in early stages of investigations and that can make them focus in the wrong direction. Then it's too painful for them to change direction and find the truth.

If you happen to fall into the statistical area of being guilty you better get a lawyer whether your guilty or not.